Bombay High Court
PANKAJ PRABHAKAR BAVISKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
Bail is granted to the accused with specified conditions pending trial.
Summary
The applicant, Pankaj Prabhakar Baviskar, was arrested for alleged fraud involving investment schemes and charged under IPC sections 420, 406, 409 and the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 sections 3 and 4. He has been in custody for over two years without trial, despite the charge being framed in January 2025 and no witnesses examined. The applicant’s counsel argued that the prolonged detention violates his right to liberty and cited the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI that bail may be granted in economic offences when investigation is complete. The State contended that the applicant misappropriated large sums and many investors remain unpaid. The Court noted the delay, lack of criminal antecedents, and the improbability of a speedy trial, and consequently granted bail on stringent conditions, including a surety of Rs. 2,00,000, reporting requirements, and travel restrictions. The bail application was therefore disposed of in the applicant’s favour.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged economic offences under IPC and the MPID Act, given the prolonged pre‑trial detention.
- Whether the delay in trial and absence of witness examination justify release on bail despite the seriousness of the charges.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 406, 409, 420
- Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- economic offences
- IPC
- MPID Act
- pre‑trial detention
- delay in trial
- conditions of bail
Judgment
15-BA-2258-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2258 OF 2026
Pankaj Prabhakar Baviskar … Applicant
Versus.
The State Of Maharashtra … Respondent
-------
Ms. Sana Khan, for the Applicant.
Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for the Respondent – State.
API Kolhe, Nashik, is present.
-------
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 17th June, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard Ms. Sana Khan, learned Advocate for the Applicant
and Mr. Ameet Palkar, learned APP for the Respondent – State.
2. By the present Application, the Applicant seeks Bail in Crime
No. 123 of 2024, registered at the Mumbai Naka Police Station,
Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, and 409
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Sections 3 and 4 of the
Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999. The
Applicant is the sole Accused in the said crime.
3. The Crime No. 123 of 2024 is now registered as Special
Arjun 1
15-BA-2258-2026.doc
(MPID) Case No. 187 of 2024 and is pending before the Additional
Sessions Judge, Nashik (“The Magistrate”).
4. The case of the prosecution is that the Accused is the
proprietor of “Baviskar Enterprises”. The Applicant floated various
investment schemes, promising and assuring high returns,
specifically claiming to double the invested capital within three
years or to provide annual returns of 18%. Based on these
assurances, various Investors invested amounts with the Applicant.
The Applicant failed to keep his promise and misappropriated the
amounts.
5. The Applicant was arrested on 17.04.2024 and remains in
jail as on date. The Bail Application at Exhibit-4, filed by the
Applicant in (Special MPID) Case No. 187 of 2024, was rejected by
the Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik, on 28.11.2024.
6. Criminal Bail Application No. 5405 of 2024, filed before this
Court, was withdrawn by the Applicant. Order dated 21.01.2025
in Criminal Bail Application No. 5405 of 2024, reads as follows:-
Arjun 2
15-BA-2258-2026.doc
1. The Bail Application is disposed of as
withdrawn.
2. Liberty to approach before the Trial Court in
case the trial is not concluded within one year.
7. Ms. Sana Khan, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits
that the Applicant has been in jail for almost 2 years and 2 months
from the date of his arrest. She submits that the Applicant, no
doubt, has received amounts from the Investors on the promise
made by him, however, the Applicant's Accounts show that various
amounts have been repaid by the Applicant to the Investors. She
submits that, due to financial difficulties, the Applicant could not
fulfill his promise to the Investors. She submits that the FIR in the
present case was filed almost 3 years after the cheques issued by
the Applicant to the Investors were returned dishonoured. She
submits that some Investors have filed 138 proceedings against the
Applicant, which are pending before the Magistrate. She submits
that the bail Application filed by the Applicant in (Special MPID)
Case No. 187 of 2024 in terms of the liberty granted by this Court
by order dated 21.01.2025 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.
5405 of 2024, was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Nashik by order dated 04.05.2026. She submits that the Applicant
Arjun 3
15-BA-2258-2026.doc
has his roots in the State of Maharashtra and that his family
members are residents of the State of Maharashtra. She submits
that the Applicant has no criminal antecedents.
8. Ms. Sana Khan, learned Advocate for the Applicant, relies
on para 46 of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI1, which reads as under :-
“46. We are conscious of the fact that the accused
are charged with economic offences of huge
magnitude. We are also conscious of the fact that the
offences alleged, if proved, may jeopardise the
economy of the country. At the same time, we cannot
lose sight of the fact that the investigating agency has
already completed investigation and the charge-sheet
is already filed before the Special Judge, CBI, New
Delhi. Therefore, their presence in the custody may
not be necessary for further investigation. We are of
the view that the appellants are entitled to the grant
of bail pending trial on stringent conditions in order
to ally the apprehension expressed by CBI.
9. Mr. Ameet Palkar, learned APP for the Respondent – State,
submits that many Investors were lured by the Applicant based on
the promise of huge returns, which the Applicant failed to fulfill
and that the Applicant also misappropriated the amounts received
1 (2012) 1 SCC 40
Arjun 4
15-BA-2258-2026.doc
from the Investors. He further submits that the investigation has
revealed that, though the Applicant has returned some amount to
the Investors, most of the Investors have not received the amounts
invested, as promised by the Applicant.
10. Perused the records with the assistance of the learned
Advocates.
11. Ms Sana Khan, learned Advocate for the Applicant states that
the charge in Special (MPID) Case No. 187 of 2024 was framed in
January, 2025, however, till date, no witnesses have been
examined in the said case. She submits that as per the chargesheet,
the prosecution has listed 19 witnesses.
12. Considering the material on record, the submissions made by
Ms. Sana Khan, learned Advocate for the Applicant, the fact that
the trial has not commenced in Special (MPID) Case No. 187 of
2024 despite the charge being framed in January 2025 and the
number of witnesses listed by the prosecution, there is little
likelihood of the trial concluding in the near future. The Applicant
has been in jail for almost 2 years and 2 months. The Applicant has
Arjun 5
15-BA-2258-2026.doc
no criminal antecedents.
13. In view of the above, further incarceration of the Applicant
pending trial is not warranted. This Application is therefore
allowed on the following terms :-
(a) Applicant is directed to be released on Bail in
connection with C.R. No. 123 of 2024 registered
with the Mumbai Naka Police Station, Mumbai, upon
furnishing a P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakhs only) with one or two sureties, in
the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik in Special (MPID)
Case No. 187 of 2024.
(b) Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade that
person from disclosing the facts to the Court or any
police officer. Applicant shall not tamper with
evidence.
(c) Applicant shall, within three (3) days of her
release from jail, provide to the Investigating Officer,
Mumbai Naka Police Station, Mumbai, his residential
address with proof, the contact numbers, e-mail and
Arjun 6
15-BA-2258-2026.doc
must inform the Investigating Officer about the
change in the same from time to time.
(d) Applicant shall deposit his passport, if any,
with the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge,
Nashik in Special (MPID) Case No. 187 of 2024
within 3 days of his release from jail.
(e) Applicant shall report to the Investigating
Officer at the Mumbai Naka Police Station, Mumbai,
twice a month, i.e. on the 2nd and 4th Saturdays of
each month, from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., until the
conclusion of trial in Special (MPID) Case No. 187
of 2024.
(f) Applicant shall regularly appear before the
Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik in Special (MPID)
Case No. 187 of 2024, as and when the matter is
fixed, unless specifically exempted.
(g) Applicant shall not travel outside the State of
Maharashtra without obtaining prior written
permission from the Investigation Officer, Mumbai
Naka Police Station, Mumbai.
14. Bail Application No. 2258 of 2026 is disposed of.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Digitally
signed by Arjun 7
ARJUN
ARJUN KRISHNA
KRISHNA RODGE
RODGE Date:
2026.06.17
21:22:12
+0530
Checking your session…